With the Arizona Cardinals not in the postseason, despite a 10-6 record, fans are left wondering 'what if?' Isn't there somehow a way that would get a playoff worthy team like the 2013 Cardinals in?
One SB Nation writer has an idea that doesn't take any perhaps less-deserving division winners out of the postseason.
The basis is that all 10-win teams should make the postseason. What would happen is that, like this season, the league would "flex" the additional team (such a scenario would have happened in five of the last nine seasons. The two seed would not get a bye in this case, but would host this flexed game.
Not only would there be more intrigue, it could also make gobs of money, as the league could bid that additional game out.
These would have been the additional games that would have been played -- most of them being pretty good.
2013: Arizona Cardinals at Carolina Panthers
2012: Chicago Bears at San Francisco 49ers
2010: New York Giants at Chicago Bears
2008: New England Patriots at Pittsburgh Steelers
2007: Cleveland Browns at Indianapolis Colts
2005: Kansas City Chiefs at Denver Broncos
It's not like the crazy ideas of doubling the size of the NCAA Tournament to include a bunch of crappy teams with no chance of winning it all. We've seen a couple wild card teams win the Super Bowl in the last decade; adding one or two more in certain years would be adding another real contender to the mix.
Forget about expanding the regular season to 18 games. The NFL Players Association doesn't want it and the players don't want it.
But expanding the playoffs with a fun, unpredictable game with a team playing on borrowed time? Everybody (except said No. 2-seed who would suddenly have a wild card game) would buy in.
I think we would agree that this would beneficial to the Cardinals this season. But do you think this is a change worth discussing? Would it be too ridiculous? Is it just another bad idea on a bad system?